Intelli‑Gel® Cushion Evidence Pack

Transcription

w w w. k irt o n -he a l thc a r e .c o .uk
E: research@kirtonhealthcare.co.uk
T: +44 (0)1440 705352
F: +44 (0)1440 706199
Intelli‑Gel® Cushion Evidence Pack
Version: March 2011
The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd, 23 Rookwood Way, Haverhill, Suffolk CB9 8PB
Contents
Introduction
1
Post Market Surveillance Statistics on the Intelli‑Gel® Cushion
2
Research Reports:
Clinical Evaluation of the Intelli‑Gel® Cushion in a Nursing Home
4
Laboratory Bench Testing of the Intelli‑Gel® Cushion using an
Instrumented Buttocks Model
16
Research and Development of Patient Support Surfaces using
XSENSOR Pressure Imaging
22
Case Study 1
36
Introduction
This document compiles the current evidence in support of the medical claims made by The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd on the
Intelli‑Gel® cushion. This is a live document to be updated when new evidence becomes available. There are three types of evidence
included:
1. Post Market Surveillance Statistics
A Post Market Surveillance Report describing all customer complaints relating to the Intelli‑Gel® Cushion for 2010. The
document gives the reported incidence proportions of pressure ulcers during that period (sample of 2,000 users).
2. Research Reports
The Research Reports describe three separate evaluations using different research methods at different stages of the design
process of the Intelli‑Gel® cushion. The in-house testing evaluated 32 cushion permutations, the independent laboratory
bench testing evaluated 4 cushions and the clinical evaluation assessed the final cushion design. A version of the clinical
evaluation manuscript has been submitted for peer review publication.
3. Case Studies
One case study describes the success of Intelli‑Gel® with a young girl suffering from Lichen Sclerosus. This case study
indicates that Intelli‑Gel® is reducing the symptoms of Lichen Sclerosus due to both pressure redistribution and skin
temperature control. A version of this case study is being considered for peer review publication
Medical Claims
Based on the available evidence, and under the advice of the Tissue Viability Consultancy Services Ltd, The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd
make the following medical claims:
1. The Intelli‑Gel® cushion can aid in preventing pressure ulcers for those at very high risk
2. The Intelli‑Gel® cushion can aid in the healing of pressure ulcers up to Grade 2 (Pressure Ulcer Advisory Pannel).
Based on these medical claims, and the supporting evidence, stand alone Intelli‑Gel® cushions and chairs manufactured by The Kirton
Healthcare Group Ltd incorporating the Intelli‑Gel® cushions are registered as Class 1 Medical Devices by the Medicines and Healthcare
products Regulatory Authority (MHRA).
Post Market Surveillance Statistics
on the Intelli‑Gel® Cushion
Period: 04/01/2010 – 04/01/2011
Quantity Sold: 2,000 into specialist seating, 500 into hospital patient chairs
Sample size: 2,000 individuals at risk of pressure ulcers
This report has been compiled by the R&D Department at The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd, as part of ongoing post market surveillance
of the Intelli‑Gel cushion. This is a requirement of the Medical Healthcare Regulatory Authority for Class 1 Medical Devices. The
information reported was supplied by the Customer Relations Department at The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd.
Summary
Of the 2,000 cases there have been only 4 customer complaints that have been associated with the Intelli‑Gel® cushion. None of these
complaints give evidence of a link between the Intelli‑Gel® cushion and the onset of a pressure ulcer. It is reported that one individual
was uncomfortable, and that existing pressure ulcers in two individuals did not heal. For one other individual there was a reported
reddening in the sacrum area but this was resolved by repositioning the Intelli‑Gel® cushion.
Incidence proportions based on the first years sales:
• In the 2,000 cases during the 12 month period, there have been no reported incidences of pressure ulcers
• Of those 2,000 cases, 0.0015% reported that existing pressure ulcers did not heal
• 0.002% of cases associated the Intelli‑Gel® with discomfort
Interpretation
Although the reported incidence proportions are extremely positive, they need to be interpreted with care. The cause and management
of pressure ulcers, whether superficial or deep, is complex and often involves multiple risk factors. The published risk factors are listed
below. Due to the nature of the specialist seating range by Kirton Healthcare, all users are considered to have reduced mobility and are
therefore at risk of pressure ulcers. It is highly probable that a major proportion of this population sample involved multiple risk factors
with varying degrees of risk. Since each case of the population sample will differ in terms of risk level(s) and type(s) it is not possible to
statistically generalise the reported incidence proportions.
Intrinsic Risk Factors
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reduced mobility or immobility
Sensory impairment
Acute illness
Level of consciousness
Extremes of age
Vascular disease
Severe chronic or terminal illness
Previous history of pressure damage
Malnutrition and dehydration
Extrinsic Risk Factors (posture and movement)
•
•
•
Pressure
Shearing
Friction
Exacerbating Risk Factors
•
•
Medication
Moisture to the skin (continence, sweating)
Inherited Clinical Guideline B: Pressure ulcer risk assessment and prevention. Issue 2001. Review 2005. National Institute for Clinical Excellence
Clinical Evaluation of the Intelli‑Gel® Cushion
in a Nursing Home
1
Fiona Collins MSc, 2 Stephen Young PhD, 3 David Wickett MA
Tissue Viability Consultancy Services Ltd, UK;
Independent Skin Science Consultant, UK;
3
The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd, UK
1
2
This manuscript is under consideration for peer review publication
Abstract
Aim of the evaluation
To evaluate the Intelli‑Gel® cushion in order to examine its effect on contributing to the prevention of pressure ulcer damage.
Materials and Methods
5 residents in a nursing home with existing pressure ulcers participated in a 4 week evaluation (mean age 89, range 78-96; mean
Waterlow Score 24, range 19-31). Intervention was exchange of the volunteers’ existing pressure relieving cushions with the Intelli‑Gel®
cushion. Clinical inspection of skin quality and high definition ultrasound measurements were carried out at the beginning of the
evaluation, after 14 days and at the end of the 4 weeks period. Data was collected from all volunteers at day 14, however only three
completed the evaluation.
Results
Both visual inspection and ultrasound measurements showed healing at day 14 for all cases, with particular significance for those with
Grade 2 pressure ulcers. At the end of the trial, there was no evidence of pressure damage for the 3 remaining volunteers. In addition,
volunteers and nursing staff reported that the cushion increased comfort, improved sitting posture and tolerance.
Conclusions
Based on this evaluation, the Intelli‑Gel® cushion has potential to be beneficial for individuals at very high risk of developing pressure
ulcers, and for those individuals who have pressure ulcers up to Grade 2. It was envisaged that improvement in skin quality would be due
to the pressure redistribution characteristics of the material but the results indicate that the cushion is also acting as a positional device
preventing posterior pelvic tilt and unloading the sacrum.
Keywords: pressure ulcer; seating; cushions; prevention
1
Introduction
The Intelli‑Gel® cushion is a new cushion designed to reduce the occurrence of pressure damage in people in long term care. The
cushion contains a unique gel component that has an open lattice design measuring 330 mm x 305 mm x 54 mm (Figure 1).
The Intelli‑Gel® cushion was bench tested at The Rehabilitation Engineering and Applied Research Lab, Georgia Tech University, using
an ISO buttock model (Figure 2). The Intelli‑Gel® cushion was evaluated against a standard polyurethane foam cushion, a polyurethane
foam cushion with a visco-elastic foam topper, and a commercially available air bladder wheelchair cushion that is inflatable to be
customized to the individual. The results indicated that the Intelli‑Gel® cushion has the potential to reduce high pressures associated
with the ischial tuberosities, exhibiting the lowest recorded pressures in this region at loads equal to or below 70 kg.
The purpose of this evaluation is to explore the effectiveness of the Intelli‑Gel® cushion in a small cohort in long term care.
Figure 1. Intelli‑Gel® cushion insert (330 mm x 305 mm x 54 mm)
Figure 2. The ISO buttock model used for bench testing at The Rehabilitation
Engineering and Applied Research Lab (REAR) at Georgia Tech University
2
2.1Volunteers
Volunteers were 5 residents in a nursing home who were considered to be at high risk of developing pressure damage, or who had
existing pressure damage (no greater than Grade 2, EPUAP). All volunteers had profiling beds and alternating air mattresses but poor
seating provision. None of the participants were able to independently transfer, all requiring hoisting. All of the participants were
doubly incontinent. All of the participants had poor nutritional intake, despite taking supplements. Volunteers were visited prior
to commencement of the evaluation in order to collect demographic data (Table 1). Informed consent was provided by either the
volunteers or those responsible for their care. The research activity undertaken by the Tissue Viability Consultancy Services Ltd complies
with the Declaration of Helsinki, 1964.
Table 1. Demographic data at beginning of the evaluation
Volunteer Age
Sex
Waterlow
General health
score
Cushion prior
to the evaluation Number of hours
spent sitting
1
96
Female
19
Cardiac failure, general frailty
Propad
05-Jun
2
92
Female
21
Angina: CVA
Castellated foam
Variable, but normally 5-6
3
78
Female
25
Alzheimer’s disease: frailty
Propad
07-Aug
4
93
Female
26
CVA; frequent falls; immobility Medform-visco
Varies greatly between
2-8. Volunteer
normally very unsettled
05-Jun
5
85
Female
31
Alzheimer’s disease: frailty
Propad
2.2 High Definition Ultrasound
High frequency diagnostic ultrasound is a non-invasive method, which allows the clinician to obtain a high-resolution image of the
wound bed (Young and Ballard 2001, Chen et al., 2001, Mirpuri and Young 2001, Kerr et al., 2006, Quintavalle et al., 2006, Young et al.,
2008, Hampton et al., 2008, Hampton et al., 2009). The technique allows the clinician to measure oedama in the skin and underlying
tissues. The presence of oedema in the tissues is one of the main indicators of the development of a Grade 1 pressure ulcer. Oedema
will be present at any site that has incurred some sort of damage and is the body’s natural response to this damage. Measurements of
oedema are taken at both the pressure sore site and at neighbouring uninjured, normal skin for comparison. The ultrasound measures
from the skin surface to a depth of approximately 10 mm.
The scanner used (Figure 3) operates at a range of frequencies from 20MHz to 50 MHz (Episcan - Longport Inc.). This frequency gives an
axial resolution of 20 - 65µm.
Figure 3. High Frequency Diagnostic Ultrasound Scanner
2.2.1High Definition Ultrasound Scan Analysis
Each scan is analysed using a form of pixel distribution analysis whereby pixels below a certain intensity are classed as Low Echogenic
Pixels (LEP). The ratio of LEP’s to Total Pixel count (TP) has been shown to reflect changes in dermal water content (Gniadecka 1996,
Gniadecka and Quistorff 1996). Using this technique it is possible to get a quantitative assessment of the level of oedema present in
tissues. Figure 4 shows the scan of one volunteer’s normal skin and Figure 5 shows the scan of the pressure ulcer.
In order to show the extent to which each volunteer’s skin had returned to normal, the data were inserted into Equation 1, and presented
as a percent reduction of oedema towards normal skin. Here, the LEP/TP value for normal skin represents zero and the LEP/TP value for
first assessment represents 100%. The percent of improvement within this range is then shown after day 14 and then day 28 for each
case.
% oedema reduction = 100[1-(lt-ln)/(l0-ln)]
(1)
Where,
ln = LEP/TP normal skin
l0 = LEP/TP day 0
lt = LEP/TP treatment (either 14 days or 28 days)
Figure 4. The ultrasound scan of one volunteer’s normal skin.
Figure 5. The ultrasound scan of one volunteer’s pressure sore. The images
shows that the deeper layers of the skin is saturated with oedema
2.3Protocol
2.3.1Day 0
All volunteers remained in bed prior to assessment. The skin of each participant was examined for signs of pressure damage.
Photographs were taken of any areas in the buttocks/sacral region that exhibited signs of pressure damage. A high definition ultrasound
scan was taken of each participant’s pressure ulcer and adjacent normal skin. The normal skin was scanned to establish a profile of what
the uninjured tissue looks like.
The volunteers existing pressure redistributing cushions were removed from their armchairs and replaced with the Intelli‑Gel® cushions.
The seat bases that supported the cushions were rigid. Volunteers were then mobilised in accordance with their care plan.
2.3.2Day 14 and 28
The above methodology was repeated, with the exception that the Intelli‑Gel® cushion remained in the armchair throughout the period
of the evaluation. Therefore none of the volunteers used their old cushion during the period of the evaluation.
3
Results
3.1 Visual Inspection of Skin Quality
On day 0, the first assessment revealed that all of the volunteers had pressure ulcers up to Grade 2 (Table 2). The skin quality on all
of the volunteers showed marked signs of improvement in their sacral and buttocks regions after using the Intelli‑Gel® cushion. The
improvement was seen on both day 14 and day 28. Of particular note were volunteers 1 and 5. Both of these had Grade 2 pressure
damage noted at the initial assessment, but both volunteers’ wounds showed significant signs of improvement during the second
assessment on day 14, as evident by the photographs in Figures 6-10.
Unfortunately volunteer 1 developed a chest infection the week prior to the final assessment and died the day before this. Volunteer
5 also developed a chest infection in the week prior to the final evaluation and had remained in bed for that week. It was therefore
considered inappropriate to reassess her, as the results could not have been related to the cushion.
On day 28 volunteers 2, 3 and 4 were assessed for the final time. None of these volunteers showed any evidence of pressure damage.
Table 2. Results for the ultrasound measurements
LEP:TP Ratios
% reduction towards normal skin
Existing
Volunteer
pressure ulcer Normal skin
Day 0
Day 14
Day 28
Day 14
1
Grade 2
0.16
0.46
0.38
27%
2
Grade 1
0.14
0.56
0.39
0.13
40%
102%
3
Grade 1
0.19
0.52
0.31
0.3
64%
67%
4
Grade 1
0.19
0.37
0.3
0.23
39%
78%
5
Grade 2
0.2
0.45
0.41
16%
Day 28
Figure 6. Volunteer 1. Day 0. Marked erythema over sacral and buttock region
Figure 7. Volunteer 1. Day 0. Skin moved to reveal a Grade 2 pressure ulcer
Figure 8. Volunteer 1. Day 14. Significant improvement was seen in the
pressure ulcer, which was now superficial and commencing epithelialisation.
Erythema of the surrounding skin was no longer present.
Figure 9. Volunteer 5. Day 0. Grade 2 pressure ulcer and marked erythema
over the sacral area
Figure 10. Volunteer 5. Day 14. Significant improvement was seen in the
pressure ulcer, which was now superficial and commencing epithelialisation
3.2 High Definition Ultrasound
Table 2 gives the results from the ultrasound measurements. The results show that for volunteer 1, oedema had reduced by 27% towards
that of the normal skin. For volunteer two, this reduction was 40% at day 14, and 100% for day 28. For volunteer 3, this was 64% at day
14 and 67% at day 28. A reduction of 39% at day 14 and 78% at day 28 was measured for volunteer 4, and a 16% reduction at day 14
was measured for volunteer 5.
4
Discussion
The result from this investigation indicate that the Intelli‑Gel® cushion can contribute to the healing of pressure sores up to Grade 2, as
assessed by visual inspection and measured by high definition ultrasound.
Previous laboratory research had shown excellent pressure redistributing characteristics of the Intelli‑Gel® cushion. Furthermore, gel
has a high specific heat capacity and the Intelli‑Gel® insert has an open structure that would appear to be beneficial in terms of moisture
transport. Although these factors are known to contribute to reducing the risk of tissue damage, the effects observed in the present
investigation may be more closely linked to posture. It was observed that all of the volunteers’ sitting posture was much improved using the
Intelli‑Gel® cushion. Previously, their posture had tended to be asymmetrical and unstable, with all volunteers tending to adopt a posterior
pelvic tilt as they slid downwards in the chair. The pressure damage found in all volunteers was consistent with sliding, as this tended to be
over their sacrum. In the case of volunteer 1 and 5 in particular, the pressure damage over the sacrum was attributed to friction and shear
forces. When using the Intelli‑Gel® cushion the volunteers’ sitting posture was far more symmetrical and stable. They tended to remain
upright in the chair, rather than sitting in a posterior pelvic tilt and this could account for the improvement seen on the skin in the sacral
area of all volunteers, as weight had been transferred appropriately onto the ischial tuberosities.
It is possible that nursing staff were more motivated to better position the volunteers during the course of the evaluation. Since there
was no control group, the influence the investigation had on the care of the volunteers cannot be determined. The evaluation was done
in the same nursing home with the same nursing staff.
It is possible that the cushion architecture helped to stabilize the pelvis in an appropriate position. The Intelli‑Gel® material is encased
in polyurethane foam on all sides except the user interface surface. It is likely that there is more immersion into the Intelli‑Gel® than
the foam border, resulting in increasing structure and support towards the edges of the cushion that could resist sliding, posterior tilt
and obliquity. This in turn could inhibit fidgeting. Not all of the volunteers were able to communicate their levels of comfort/discomfort,
but those who could, reported that the Intelli‑Gel® cushion provided improved comfort compared to their original pressure reducing
cushion. However, the nursing staff also reported that the volunteers appeared to be far more comfortable. Of particular note were
volunteers 3 and 4, whose agitation and restlessness when sitting was significantly diminished.
Probably for the reasons above, all of the volunteers were able to sit for longer periods of time in comparison to previously, particularly
volunteer 3. On average sitting tolerance was extended by two hours for each volunteer.
5
Conclusion
Based on this evaluation alone, the Intelli‑Gel® cushion shows potential in contributing to healing pressure ulcers up to Grade 2, and
as an aid to preventing pressure ulcers for those at very high risk. Furthermore, the use of the Intelli‑Gel® cushion enabled all of the
volunteers to sit more comfortably, with an upright and symmetrical posture, for longer. A larger control study involving a modification
to this protocol would be the next logical step towards understanding how these findings can be generalised to the wider population.
6
Conflict of Interest Statement
The research lead of this investigation, Fiona Collins, is a Director of Tissue Viability Consultancy Services Ltd and was commissioned
by The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd to conduct this investigation. The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd has an ongoing professional
relationship with Tissue Viability Consultancy Services Ltd, having worked together to provide training days for Occupational Therapists.
Dr Stephen Young is an associate of Tissue Viability Consultancy Services Ltd and was employed to work on this project.
David Wickett, corresponding author, is an employee of The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd.
7
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the volunteers and nursing home staff who kindly took part in this evaluation.
Role of the funding source
This research was sponsored by The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd. Kirton’s involvement in this evaluation is via the corresponding author
David Wickett, who is an employee of the company. His involvement was in interpretation of the data, in contributing to the writing of
the manuscript and in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
8
References
1. European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel
2. Young, S.R., Ballard, K., 2001. Wound Assessment: Diagnostic and assessment applications – Part 2. In: Electrotherapy-Evidence
based practice. Churchill-Livingstone (London) pp 308-312
3. Chen, L., Dyson, M., Rymer, J., et al., 2001. The use of high frequency diagnostic ultrasound to investigate the effect of HRT on skin
thickness. Skin Research and Technology 7(2): 95-7
4. Mirpuri, N., Young, S.R., 2001. The use of diagnostic ultrasound to assess the skin changes that occur during normal and
hypertensive pregnancies. Skin Research and Technology 7:63-69
5. Kerr, A., Young, S., Hampton, S., 2006. Has packing sinus wounds become a ritualistic practice? British Journal of Nursing 15(19):
S27-S30
6. Quintavalle, P., Lyder, C.H., Mertz, P.J., et al., 2006. Use of high-resolution, high frequency diagnostic ultrasound to investigate the
pathogenesis of pressure ulcer development. Adv. Skin & Wound Care 19(9):498-505
7. Young, S., Bolton, P.A., Downie, J., 2008. Use of high-frequency ultrasound in the assessment of injectable dermal fillers. Skin
Research and Technology 1(14): 1-4
8. Hampton, S., Young, S., Kerr, A., 2008 Treating Sinus Wounds. Journal of Community Medicine 22(6):30-32
9. Hampton, S., Young, S., Bree-Aslan, C., et al., 2009. Parafricta material: can it reduce the potential for pressure damage? Journal of
Community Nursing 23(4): 28-31
10. Gniadecka, M., 1996. Localization of dermal edema in lipodermatosclerosis, lymphedema, and cardiac insufficiency: high-frequency
ultrasound examination of intradermal echogenicity. J Am Acad Dermatol. 35:37-41
11. Gniadecka, M., Quistorff, B., 1996. Assessment of dermal water by high-frequency ultrasound: comparative studies with nuclear
magnetic resonance. Br J Dermatol. 135:218-224
Laboratory Bench Testing of the
Intelli‑Gel® Cushion using an
Instrumented Buttocks Model
1
Introduction
A new pressure relieving seat cushion for long term care had been developed by The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd. In-house testing using
XSENSOR Pressure Imaging had shown potential for the new Intelli‑Gel® cushion to be positioned next to the market leaders for pressure
redistribution. Although very positive, there was concern that the results could be biased since the testing was carried out internally at
The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd. Furthermore, a recent study showed that pressure mats exhibit poor repeatability (Pipkin and Sprigle
2008). To verify the in-house findings, the Rehab Engineering and Applied Research Lab (REAR) at the Georgia Institute of Technology
were commissioned to undertake independent tests using a more repeatable method involving an instrumented buttocks model.
The data from REAR corroborate the data collected using the XSENSOR system. The new Intelli‑Gel® cushion resulted in lower interface
pressures under the ischial tuberosity (IT) region than the Air cushion at loads equal to or below 70 kg (11 stones). At these loads,
pressures at the IT site were approximately 33% lower than the viscoelastic cushion; and 47% lower than the standard polyurethane
cushion. The data from REAR indicated relatively high pressures at the greater trochanter site for the Intelli‑Gel® cushion however
the buttocks model does not include the thighs where pressures would normally be shared. The Intelli‑Gel® cushion was assessed in
a follow-up test using the XSENSOR Pressure Imaging System and a human volunteer side leaning. No signs of high pressures at the
greater trochanters were observed. Higher pressures towards the outer margins of the buttocks could be beneficial in terms of sitting
stability.
2
A prototype Intelli‑Gel® cushion wrapped in a fire retardant barrier fabric, a viscoelastic foam cushion (with a polyurethane core), a
single valve air cushion and a standard polyurethane foam cushion were compared. Pressures were measured at multiple locations along
the midline of an instrumented buttock model (Figure 1). The cushions were measured five times a day, over three days, for three loading
conditions corresponding to body masses: 56, 70 and 84 kg. The inflation pressure of the air cushion was readjusted for each loading
condition. All testing was carried out independently by technicians at REAR.
Figure 1. The REAR instrumented buttocks model showing pressure sensors
3
Results
The mean pressure for each test day, and average of all days are given in Table 1 for the IT sensor with an 84 kg load. Table 2 and 3
present the IT sensor pressures for a 70 and 56 kg load respectively.
Table 1. IT sensor pressure data (mmHg) loaded to 84 kg
Day
Polyurethane cushion
Viscoelastic
foam cushion
Intelli‑Gel®Air
cushion
cushion
1
144.46
86.74
79.6
68.06
2
155.07
100.68
84.22
68.17
3 138.4187.3263.12
50.97
AVG
145.9891.5875.6562.4
Day
Viscoelastic
foam cushion
Intelli‑Gel®Air
cushion
cushion
1 95.0366.1947.68
42.39
2
106.31
79.3
51.96
79.3
3 92.9767.0644.37
39.39
AVG 98.170.8548.01
53.69
Day
Viscoelastic
foam cushion
Intelli‑Gel®Air
cushion
cushion
1 61.8453.5330.55 46
2 72.8365.8144.16
42.27
3 60.7554.6336.65
39.43
AVG65.1457.9937.12
42.57
4
Discussion
The data from REAR suggest that for an 84 kg load, the viscoelastic foam cushion reduces IT pressure relative to the standard
polyurethane foam by 37%, for a 70 kg load there is a reduction of 28% and for a 56 kg load there is a reduction of 11%. REAR supplied
the polyurethane foam cushion which had a 76 mm thickness. The viscoelastic foam was 90 mm thick so the reduction in IT pressure
could result in part from the additional thickness. The Intelli‑Gel® cushion was also 90 mm thick so comparisons are made to the viscoelastic cushion.
The data indicate that for an 84 kg load, the Intelli‑Gel® cushion reduces IT pressure by 17% when compared to the viscoelastic foam
cushion. For a 70 kg load the Intelli‑Gel® cushion reduces IT pressure by 32% and for a 56 kg load IT pressure is reduced by 36%.
Under an 84 kg load, the Air cushion reduces IT pressure relative to the viscoelastic foam cushion by 32%, under a 70 kg load by 25%
and for a 56 kg load 27%.
Taken over all load conditions, these data suggest that when compared to the viscoelastic foam cushion, both the Intelli‑Gel® and Air
cushion result in similar reductions of IT pressures (27% and 28% respectively). At loads equal to or lower than 70 kg, the Intelli‑Gel®
appears to be more effective in reducing IT pressures than the Air cushion.
When comparing the pressures at the most distal sensor between the Intelli‑Gel® cushion and the viscoelastic foam cushion it can be
seen that the Intelli‑Gel® cushion results in higher pressures by a factor of approximately 2.5. These sensors could be considered to
represent the greater trochanters. Tables 4 and 5 show the pressure data for the IT and greater trochanter sensors for the different
load conditions and the difference between these two sites for the Intelli‑Gel® cushion and viscoelastic foam cushion respectively.
These data show that for the Intelli‑Gel® cushion, there is more pressure at the greater trochanter than in the IT area, whereas there is
more pressure in the IT area and less at the greater trochanter for the viscoelastic foam cushion. An explanation for why the Intelli‑Gel
cushion is redistributing pressure to the outer margins of the buttock could be in the claims made by the inventors of the Intelli‑Gel
material. They claim that Intelli‑Gel redistributes pressure due to the ‘column buckling’ principle. For areas of high pressures (in this case
the ITs) the gel columns buckle and pass the loading onto larger surface areas where the pressures are lower (in this case the surfaces
surrounding the ITs). In these lower pressure areas, the gel column do not buckle and support the body. Low pressures are associated
with the buckled columns because they have low spring-back forces. The ability of the Intelli‑Gel cushion to redistribute interface
pressure to the outer margins of the buttocks could actually be beneficial when considering sitting stability by ‘framing’ and securing
the buttocks.
Table 4. Pressure data (mmHg) for the IT and greater trochanter sensors at different load
conditions for the Intelli‑Gel® cushion
Load
84 kg
70 kg
56 kg
IT
Trochanter
75.65
48.01
37.12
92.2
86.09
72.91
Difference
+16.56
+38.09
+35.79
Table 5. Pressure data (mmHg) for the IT and greater trochanter sensors at different load
conditions for the viscoelastic foam cushion
Load
84 kg
70 kg
56 kg
IT
91.58
70.85
57.99
Trochanter
Difference
47.51-44.07
30.4-40.45
19.98-38.01
The instrumented buttocks model developed at REAR is capable of producing repeatable results to help to differentiate between
cushions. REAR have explained that they switched to this method of testing from using commercially available pressure mapping
systems because they found it was not possible to gain repeatable results in equal conditions with pressure mapping systems. Caution
is needed however when interpreting the data from the buttocks model. The model represents the pelvis of the body only (Figure 1). The
thighs are not represented in this model. The results of this laboratory study have shown redistributing characteristics of the Intelli‑Gel®
cushion, probably due to column buckling at the high pressure regions of the ITs. Since the thighs are not represented in the buttock
model the only area where pressure can redistribute to is the outer margins of the buttocks and the greater trochanter sensors. With the
human body, these pressures would be shared across the thighs so in reality they could be lower.
Follow up measurements were made to test this hypothesis. Interface Pressure Imaging data were collected from one 58 year old
ectomorph male (BMI 19.4) in normal sitting, side leaning to the left and side leaning to the right. These data were collected at The
Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd and the intention was to deliberately load the greater trochanters. Figures 2 – 4 show the resulting pressure
maps which show no signs of high pressures at areas that could be associated with the greater trochanters.
Figure 4. Normal sitting on the Intelli‑Gel® cushion
Figure 5. Side leaning to the left on the Intelli‑Gel® cushion
Figure 5. Side leaning to the right on the Intelli‑Gel® cushion
5
Conclusion
The data from REAR verify the results from the in-house tests and indicate that the Intelli‑Gel® cushion reduces IT pressure to a
similar magnitude to air cushions, and could therefore be positioned alongside the market leaders for pressure relief. The data show
that the Intelli‑Gel® cushion redistributes pressure to the distal margins of the buttocks which could be advantageous in terms of
cushion stability. Subsequent in-house interface pressure imaging showed no evidence of any risk of tissue damage around the greater
trochanters.
It is recommended that a clinical study using volunteers representative of the intended end users be carried out to validate the
effectiveness of the cushion and to determine what medical claims are appropriate.
6
References
1. Pipkin, L., Sprigle, S., 2008. Effect of model design, cushion construction, and interface pressure mats on interface pressure and
immersion. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 45(6): 875-882
Research and Development of
Patient Support Surfaces using
XSENSOR Pressure Imaging
1
Introduction
The R&D team at The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd carried out research to source current and future materials for seat cushions that
could help to reduce the risk of pressure ulcers. The first part of this report evaluates those materials in varying combinations and with
different types of base supports using the XSENSOR Pressure Imaging System and one test subject. The findings indicate a trend where
all material combinations that involve the Intelli‑Gel® material result in the lowest Peak Pressure Index values.
The second part of this report describes the process of developing a cushion that incorporates Intelli‑Gel® for seating in long term care.
Two adults (one mesomorph and one ectomorph) and two children participated over the course of the cushion development and the
XSENSOR Pressure Imaging System was used for collecting data. The final cushion specification is benchmarked against a viscoelastic
pressure relieving foam cushion and a single valve air cushion that is customised to the individual’s weight.
The results indicate that the final cushion specification has superior pressure redistributing qualities when compared to the viscoelastic
foam cushion, and exhibits similar pressure characteristics to the air cushion. It is recommended that the final specification be tested in
an independent laboratory to verify these results.
2
2.1 Research into current and future materials
The criteria for the selection of materials included cost, the ability to provide a therapeutic effect over a relatively large surface area (as
opposed to a specific site such as directly under the ischial tuberosities), a performance unaffected by seat tilt (fluid bags for example
were rejected because they pool when tilted) and no need for set-up or adjustment for multiple users. In addition to redistributing
pressure, the ability of the materials to reduce shear, maintain a dry interface and to preserve skin temperatures were important
functional parameters. A list of the materials collected is given in Table 1, with accompanying images in Figures 1-10. The materials
were tested in various combinations, and are described as having a core material and one or more toppers. Variations in the cushion
support were investigated with a rigid flat base, a rigid contoured base and a contoured elastomeric mesh base (Figures 11). Table 1
gives scores for the likely benefit of each material in terms of vapour permeability and specific heat capacity. Specific heat capacity
relates to the amount of energy required to heat a material, i.e. materials with a low specific heat capacity heat up easily. An air cushion
that can be customised to the individual is also included for benchmarking data as this was considered a market leader for pressure
redistribution (Figure 12). All cushions were evaluated on a multi-adjustable test-rig (Figure 14).
Table 1. Selection of materials, with scores for vapour permeability and specific heat capacity
Material/technology
Thickness Figure
(mm)
Phase 1
research
Topper
Core
Other complete cushions
Base
Flat gel
Castellated gel
Soft spacer fabric
Firm spacer fabric
Red Intelli‑Gel®
Blue Intelli‑Gel®
Yellow viscoelastic foam
Blue viscoelastic foam
Core spacer fabric
400 density polyurethane foam
Water-cell cushion (manufactured in 2003)
Water-cell cushion (new foam)
100% blue viscoelastic foam
100% yellow viscoelastic foam
Commercial viscoelastic cushion
Rigid flat
Rigid contoured
Flexible contoured (elastomeric mesh)
Phase 2
research
Topper
Core
Base
Other complete cushions
Red Intelli‑Gel®
Soft spacer fabric
Firm spacer fabric
Dacron
Deep Intelli‑Gel®
Rigid flat
Inflatable air cushion
Vapour High Specific
Permeable Heat Capacity
✗
15-18
1
20
2
✗
15
3
3
10
4
33
305 3
256 3
25
3
25
3
40
7
333
40
3
40
3
90
8
3
90
3
90
3
90
3
80
3
10
11
✓33
333
✗
✗
333
333
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
✗
305 3
15
3
3
10
4
33
25
3
609 3
40
3
40
3
12
3
333
✗
✗
✗
333
✗
✗
✗
Figure 1. Flat gel
Figure 2. Castellated gel
Figure 3. Firm spacer fabric
Figure 4. Soft spacer fabric
Figure 5. Red Intelli‑Gel®
Figure 6. Blue Intelli‑Gel®
Figure 7. Core spacer fabric Figure 8. Water-cell cushion
Figure 9. Deep Intelli‑Gel®
Figure 10. Commercial viscoelastic cushion
Figure 11. Flexible contoured (elastomeric mesh)
Figure 12. Air inflatable bladder cushion
Figure 13. Test-rig and XSENSOR Pressure Imaging system
2.2 XSENSOR Pressure Imaging System
The XSENSOR Pressure Imaging System was used to measure seat interface pressures (Figure 13). The system consists of a pressure
mat and an X3 sensor platform to provide a communication relay function and power for the pressure mat. The XSENSOR 4.3 Industrial
software was used for operating the system and collecting data.
The pressure mat is thin and flexible, and contains capacitive sensors. The mat consists of a 36 x 36 array of sensors (1296 measuring
points in total) and covers a sensing area of 457 x 457 mm. The sensor spatial resolution is 12.7 mm, with no gaps between sensors. The
advantages of capacitive sensors are high repeatability, high accuracy, low hysteresis, and no need for frequent calibration, as is the
case for resistive sensors (Mootanah & Bader, 2006). In addition, the study by Pipkin and Sprigle (2008) suggested a low perturbation
error with the XSENSOR mats. The pressure range is 10–200 mmHg, and the manufacturer claims an accuracy of 10%. Prior to the
testing, the sensor mat was sent to the manufacturer for calibration.
2.3Protocol
2.3.1Stage 1
Thirty two cushion permutations were measured during the first stage of this research. Data were collected from one subject only due
to the time required for completion. Once the cushion and sensing mat had been fitted to the test-rig, the subject sat for a 10 minute
stabilisation period prior to data collection. This was to allow for creep in the cushion, sensors and body tissues to stabilise. 10 minutes
was found to be necessary since viscoelastic foams had been included which require ‘warming up’ to reach their maximum benefit.
Immediately following the stabilisation period, data were recorded for 36 seconds with the subject remaining as still as possible. This
recording period was then repeated twice, with a 5 minute recovery period between measurements. Each data set therefore contained 3
recordings.
2.3.2Stage 2
The second part of this research focused down on developing a cushion built around the Intelli‑Gel® material. More samples of
the Intelli‑Gel® material varying in gel type, wall size, grid density, column height and manufacturing techniques were supplied for
further investigation. The pressure distributions of material combinations incorporating these Intelli‑Gel® samples, viscoelastic and
polyurethane foams, and spacer fabrics were compared in an iterative process to filter down towards a final specification. This final
specification was then benchmarked against a standard polyurethane foam cushion, a commercially available viscoelastic foam cushion
(with a polyurethane core) and a commercially available air cushion. The results of the benchmarking tests are reported here.
The protocol underwent modifications during this second stage of research depending on the temperate and creep characteristics
of the materials being compared. The base support was standardised to flat plywood. Two adult males, one mesomorph aged 30 and
one ectomorph aged 58, and two children participated at different stages of this process. The benchmarking data on the final cushion
specification are from the 30 year old male. The first comparison had a 5 minute stabilisation period for each cushion, with the subject
repositioning between measurements. Each data set contained 3 recordings which were then averaged. A different protocol was used
for the viscoelastic foam cushion. This had a 10 minute stabilisation period and the subject did not reposition between measurements.
This was in an attempt to ‘warm up’ the viscoelastic foam. The Intelli‑Gel® and air cushions were compared again in two subsequent test
sessions. Interface pressure data is also reported for the air cushion where it was first maximally inflated, and then for each deflation
level until eventually bottoming out.
2.4 Interpretation of interface pressure data
The interface pressure variable selected for comparing all data was Peak Pressure Index (PPI). PPI is the mean of the highest recorded
pressure values within a 9-10 cm² area (approximately the contact area of an ischial tuberosity and other bony prominences) under one
of the loading-bearing surfaces (ischial tuberosities, greater trochanters, and sacrum/coccyx). Analysing single sensor peak pressures
proves problematic because it is an unstable measure that exhibits poor repeatability (Sprigle, et al., 2003). Average pressure is reliable
but not very volatile because a lot of body weight is concentrated on only a portion of the surface area of the mat. Hence, calculating a
mean pressure value loses much meaning (Sprigle, et al., 2003).
3
Results
The means and standard deviations for the stage 1 part of this research are presented in Table 2 and Figure 14. The data from the final
cushion specification resulting from stage 2 are given in Table 3 and Figure 15. Figure 16 gives data on the effect of different inflation
pressures for the air cushion on interface pressure.
Table 2. Mean Peak Pressure Index (mmHg) and Standard Deviations from Stage 1
Ref Topper
A1
B1
C1
D1
E1
F1
G1
H1
J1
K1
M1
N1
O1
P1
Q1
R1
S1
T1
U1
V1
W1
X1
Y1
Z1
A2
B2
C2
D2
E2
F2
G2
H2
Red Intelli‑Gel®
Firm spacer fabric + red Intelli‑Gel®
Red Intelli‑Gel®
Red Intelli‑Gel®
Blue Intelli‑Gel®
Firm spacer fabric + red Intelli‑Gel®
Red Intelli‑Gel®
Water-cell cushion (used)
Castellated gel
Firm spacer fabric + red Intelli‑Gel® + soft spacer fabric
No topper
Red Intelli‑Gel® + soft spacer fabric
Water-cell cushion (new)
Red Intelli‑Gel®
Water-cell cushion (used)
Soft spacer fabric
Firm spacer fabric
Water-cell cushion (new)
Castellated gel
Soft spacer fabric
Red Intelli‑Gel® + soft spacer fabric
Firm spacer fabric
100% blue viscoelastic foam
Commercial viscoelastic cushion
Flat gel
100% yellow viscoelastic foam
Core
Base
Mean PPI
STDEV
400 PU
400 PU
Core spacer fabric
400 PU
400 PU
400 PU
650 PU
400 PU
400 PU
400 PU
400 PU
400 PU
400 PU
Core spacer fabric
400 PU
Core spacer fabric
400 PU
650 PU
Core spacer fabric
Core spacer fabric
650 PU
650 PU
650 PU
400 PU
400 PU
Flexible Contoured
Flexible Contoured
Flexible Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Flat
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Flat
Flexible Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Flat
Rigid Contoured
Flexible Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Rigid Contoured
Flexible Contoured
Flexible Contoured
Rigid Flat
Rigid Contoured
Flexible Contoured
63.74
65.97
67.42
67.82
69.55
70.96
72.52
73.05
74.25
74.35
74.78
75.05
76.65
75.91
76.67
77.52
77.77
77.81
78
78.91
79.55
79.97
80.14
80.92
81.24
81.35
82.52
82.91
85.52
89.43
90.19
96.95
2.33
3.99
3.69
4.31
3.18
4.21
3.72
1.8
2.32
1.49
4.76
1.91
1.9
1.23
1.08
1.04
4.32
2.48
1.56
1.55
3.48
5.07
3.87
1.79
2.55
3.57
1.62
3.11
4.33
1.69
7.36
5.23
105.00
100.00
Peak Pressure Index (mmHg)
95.00
90.00
85.00
80.00
75.00
70.00
65.00
60.00
A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1 G1 H1 J1 K1 M1 N1 O1 P1 Q1 R1 S1 T1 U1 V1 W1 X1 Y1 Z1 A2 B
2 C2 D2 E2 F2 G2 H2
Cushion types
Figure 14. Mean Peak Pressure Index (mmHg) and Standard Deviations from Stage 1
Table 3. Mean Peak Pressure Index (mmHg) and Standard Deviations from Stage 2
Average
STDEV
Comparison 1
Comparison 2
Comparison 3
169.1
163.41
193.26
199.24
159.13
166.26
178.81
169.71
0.8
1.53
3.01
1.02
2.11
1.36
4.77
3.19
Air cushion
Intelli‑Gel® cushion
PU foam (650)
Viscoelastic cushion
Air cushion
Air cushion
220
200
180
160
140
120
n
io
sh
cu
el
In
te
lliG
Ai
rc
us
h
io
n
n
io
sh
cu
el
rc
us
hi
on
on
Ai
In
te
lliG
Vi
sc
oe
la
st
ic
fo
a
m
cu
sh
i
(6
50
)
io
sh
PU
cu
el
In
te
lliG
Ai
rc
us
hi
on
n
100
Cushion type
Figure 15. Mean Peak Pressure Index (mmHg) and Standard Deviations from Stage 2
195
190
185
180
175
170
165
160
155
150
145
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Air cushion inflation level (9=maximum pressure, 1= miniumum pressure)
Figure 16. Peak Pressure Index values for an air cushion at various inflation levels
4
Discussion
Interface Pressure Imaging has been used by the R&D team at The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd to help guide decision making through
the development of advanced pressure redistributing seat cushions for long term care. Although Pressure Imaging provides useful data,
there are limitations that need to be acknowledged when interpreting the results.
Firstly, the presence of the pressure mat at the body/support interface has an effect on the true pressures that would exist normally.
This is known as the perturbation error. Pipkin and Sprigle (2008) evaluated the perturbation error for a number of different pressure
mats using two artificial buttock models to collect data. They found that all pressure mats affected the readings, and in general most
underestimated the baseline data which supports Diesing’s conclusions (2002). The perturbation error was different for each mat
depending on the cushion type, which suggests that different pressure mapping systems could rank cushions in different orders. Pipkin
and Sprigle (2008) found that the two pressure mats that had the least perturbation error were the ConforMat and the XSENSOR mat.
The authors also found pressure mapping to have limited repeatability.
During stage 2 of this research, data was collected from subjects that differed in body type which meant that inter-subject comparisons
could not be made statistically (Swain and Peters 1997). It was considered important however to evaluate the cushion with a
heterogeneous group in order to develop the best understanding of the cushion’s characteristics with the resources available at the
time. In addition to this the protocol was modified several times during stage 2 depending on the expected rate at which the cushion
would stabilise which again made it not possible to draw statistical comparisons between different test sessions. Only the benchmarking
on the final cushion specification is reported.
The results of stage 1 suggest that a trend may exist where all cushion combinations incorporating the Intelli‑Gel® material result in
the lowest Peak Pressure Index values. In addition to the pressure redistributing potential of this material, it appears to be beneficial
for controlling skin temperature and moisture build up. Previous studies have shown that gel wheelchair cushions maintain a constant
skin temperature (Fisher et al. 1978, Stewart et al. 1980) whereas foams and viscoelastic foams have been demonstrated to increase
skin temperatures by 3.4C and 2.8C respectively (Stewart et al. 1980). Increasing skin temperature is undesirable because there is an
accompanying increase in metabolism (Bruetman and Gordon, 1971). It has been shown that a 1° increase in temperature increases
tissue metabolism by 10% (Ruch and Patton, 1965). Increasing tissue metabolism results in an increased demand for oxygen. If tissue
demand for oxygen is not met cell necrosis can happen. This supply and demand relationship is central to pressure ulcer development.
Therefore, the high specific heat capacity of gel makes it a very suitable material for use in seat cushions designed to reduce the risk of
tissue breakdown. A problem with gels that are commonly available on the market is that they are impermeable to vapour. The study
by Stewart et al., (1980) demonstrated that relative humidity at the skin/cushion interface increased by 22.8% with gels compared to
10.4% with foams. Increased humidity could compromise skin strength making it more prone to mechanical damage from shear stress
or abrasion. Furthermore, dry skin offers less risk of infection. The Intelli‑Gel® material is different from conventional gels in that it has
an open lattice design which permits moisture to transport away from the skin/cushion interface and through the gel columns.
The manufacturers of Intelli‑Gel® claim that the material is beneficial because of the ‘column buckling’ principle. Here, it is said that the
gel columns buckle under areas of peak pressure such as bony prominences but under other areas where pressure is evenly distributed
the columns remain structural and support the body. Thus, the Intelli‑Gel® is said to eliminate high pressures. The R&D team at The
Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd found however that the Intelli‑Gel® did not always respond the same way under applied load. On some
occasions the gel columns buckled as intended, but on other occasions there was more of a toppling over which can be likened to falling
dominos. Intelli‑Gel® had been previously used in bed mattresses where this problem may not exist due to a much larger surface area
supporting the body when lying. However, in a seat cushion it appeared that the Intelli‑Gel® needed more surface structure to help
control how the columns responded to the higher pressures. This was achieved by inserting the Intelli‑Gel® into a foam border and
fusing a light weight non-stretch fabric to the face surface of the gel and foam surround. A foam base was also included which built up
the cushion to the require 90mm thickness, and gave the additional cushioning necessary for occasions when the Intelli‑Gel® began
to bottom out. An additional advantage of this cushion design is that the foam border can be easily modified to produce a cushion of
practically any size, which is particularly beneficial for supplying the extensive range of seat sizes common in long term care.
The results from benchmarking the final specification are presented in Table 3 and Figure 15. Here, it can be seen that there is a
significant difference between the polyurethane and viscoelastic foam cushions compared to the Intelli‑Gel® and air cushions. Of
the three comparisons between the Intelli‑Gel® and the air cushions, the Intelli‑Gel® cushion scored better in two. The reason for the
differences in these three comparisons is the inflation pressure of the air cushion. Figure 16 shows how the interface pressures change
as the inflation pressure changes. This suggests that the air cushion has the potential to produce very low interface pressures but that it
is difficult to hone in on the correct inflation pressure. During the benchmarking tests, the air cushion was tested three times but in only
one of those three tests was the cushion inflated to its optimum for that subject.
5
Conclusion
Based on the work carried out by the R&D team at The Kirton Healthcare Group Ltd, the final specification for the Intelli‑Gel® cushion
showed potential to exhibit similar pressure redistributing characteristics to adjustable air cushions, and could therefore be positioned
alongside the market leaders for pressure relief. An independent laboratory study would be the next logical step towards verifying these
findings, before moving to a clinical study.
6
References
1. Mootanah, R., Bader, D., 2006. Pressure sensors in biomedical engineering. In Wiley’s Encyclopaedia of Biomedical Engineering. John
Wiley and Sons, New York.
2. Pipkin, L., Sprigle, S., 2008. Effect of model design, cushion construction, and interface pressure mats on interface pressure and
immersion. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development. 45(6): 875-882.
3. Sprigle, S., Dunlop, M.S., Press, L., 2003. Reliability of bench tests of interface pressure. Assistive Technology. 15: 49-57.
4. Diesing, P., Hochman, D., Boenick, U., 2002. Numerical accuracy of pressure mapping systems - a comparative evaluation. European
Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, ed.
5. Swain, I.D., Peters, E., 1997. The effects of posture body mass index and wheelchair adjustment on interface pressures. Evaluation
Report MDA/97/20. Medical Devices Agency
6. Fisher, S.V., et al., 1978. Wheelchair cushion effect on skin temperature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 59: 68-72
7. Stewart, S.F.C., Palmieri, V., Cochran, V.B., 1980. Wheelchair cushion effect on skin temperature, heat flux, and relative humidity.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 61: 229-233
8. Bruetman, M.E., Gordon, E.E., 1971. Rehabilitating stroke patients at general hospitals. Postgrad Med. 49: 211-215
9. Ruch, R.C., Patton, H.D., (eds) 1965. Physiology and Biophysics. ED 19, Philadelphia, Saunders. p 1046
Case Study 1
Anna has been suffering for as long as we can remember, with numerous visits to our GP and to Paediatricians. About two years ago she
was diagnosed with Lichen Schlerosus and she was started on a regime of creams and steroids.
What is lichen sclerosus?
Lichen sclerosus is a chronic, usually itchy, skin disease of the genital skin. The most common groups to be affected by it are middle
aged and older women but it can occur in children. The skin in the genital area appears as white skin patches.
What causes lichen sclerosus?
The cause of lichen sclerosus is unknown. It can be associated, in some patients (and/or their close relatives), with autoimmune
diseases, such as thyroid disorders or vitiligo. These occur when the cells and proteins that the body uses to fight off infection start to
damage the bodies own tissues and prevent their normal actions.
Lichen sclerosus is not an infection and is not contagious.
What are the symptoms?
•
•
•
•
•
•
Itching is the most common symptom and some people experience soreness and burning.
The skin becomes pale and white in appearance. This may be patchy or involve all of the vulva extending down to the anus.
The area may split causing stinging and pain.
Children usually complain of itching and are constantly scratching and rubbing at their vulva. They may develop burning or
pain with urination and with bowel movement and may even develop constipation.
Small purplish/red areas may be seen on the white background. These are due to tiny areas of bleeding into the skin, often
because of scratching.
There may be scarring that causes loss of vulvar tissue (e.g. clitoris) or shrinkage of the vulvar areas, which can cause pain and
interfere with sexual intercourse and even cause problems urination.
It does not involve the vagina
Anna has had a particularly bad few months with her skin. The Lichen schlerosus has moved further down and around her anus making
it difficult for her to go to the toilet without pain, we had a hospital admission for faecal impaction, for which she received a phosphate
enema. Anna takes movicol ( a stool softener) every day and has for the last 2 years.
Anna never has a pain score below 2- 3 (0 being no pain 10 being unbearable pain) even on a day when her skin is ok. She finds it very
difficult to sit still for any amount of time and before having her cushion from Kirton Healthcare would sit on the edge of a chair or with
her foot under her so that her bottom does not take full pressure. The cushion has made a considerable difference to her a school and
her teachers have seen a marked difference in her, she has had fewer absences from school also because she feels more able to cope at
school on ‘ sore days’.
One of the most incapacitating effects of Lichen Schlerosus is broken sleep. As soon as Anna gets into bed the itching and irritation
starts. The summer months are particularly bad as the heat at night seems to aggravate it also.
Anna is still receiving treatment from the dermatology department, we are using an emollient and a steroid every day, and although
some days her skin looks fine and clear, the next day it is back. She has learnt to avoid things that hurt her bottom, like bike riding and
swimming and pursue other interests.
Additional comments from a tissue viability specialist
During my last visit to Anna, Mum stated that the Intelli‑Gel cushion (slim green material) had been an enormous benefit to Anna.
She carries it everywhere in a special PE kit type cotton bag, so that it doesn’t get damaged. Up until this point, Anna has transported
the cushion from home to school and back each day. However, Kirton Healthcare has now kindly provided Anna with another sheet of
Intelli‑Gel – a blue deeper model.
Anna’s mum informed Fiona that the cushion has transformed their ability to travel for long distances in the car – previously this was
limited and traumatic due to Anna’s discomfort. Holidays are now being considered!
One of Anna’s main difficulties is the ability to sleep at night, particularly in the summer, as she becomes so hot – the trigger for her
discomfort. We have therefore wondered whether the use of a deep Intelli‑Gel insert built into a surrounding matrix of foam (not
viscoelastic / memory foam as this will cause heat issues) will assist in improving her quality of sleep. A thin cotton sheet would be the
only material that could cover the mattress however, in order to minimise heat. Anna’s current mattress measures 35” x 74” (89cm x
188cm).
Anna is extremely excited at the prospect of trying an Intelli‑Gel mattress – as is her mother and they are very happy to provide any
feedback that is required! We have even wondered about publishing this as a single case study in a journal as it could help other lichen
sclerosis sufferers.

Intelli‑Gel® Cushion Evidence Pack

Transcription

Similar documents

1 2 Seat Cushion Reupholster

Gel Cushions T-Gel

NexStep® Cushion Tile

UPEASY Lifting Cushion Brochure

Anniversary Promotion

essie·gel la palette de couleurs - Haar

Heli-Cushions - Helitowcart.com

shopp ing